All these shaky lifelines Remainers are getting must be awful. Maybe you can convince the Lords to sacrifice themselves and block it. But probably not.

There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

I don't think for a moment that Parliament will refuse to trigger Article 50, but at least there will now be some oversight from the legislature on the terms and timing of said triggering, you know, the way a parliamentary democracy is meant to work, rather than this "executive directly interpreting the 'will of the people'" bullshit that's been going on far too much recently.

Quercus wrote:I don't think for a moment that Parliament will refuse to trigger Article 50, but at least there will now be some oversight from the legislature on the terms and timing of said triggering, you know, the way a parliamentary democracy is meant to work, rather than this "executive directly interpreting the 'will of the people'" bullshit that's been going on far too much recently.

This is the biggest reason why brexit regret is a myth. Or at least over rated.

Quercus wrote:I don't think for a moment that Parliament will refuse to trigger Article 50, but at least there will now be some oversight from the legislature on the terms and timing of said triggering, you know, the way a parliamentary democracy is meant to work, rather than this "executive directly interpreting the 'will of the people'" bullshit that's been going on far too much recently.

This is the biggest reason why brexit regret is a myth. Or at least over rated.

The government has so many chances to reverse course and all they're doing is discussing how hard or gay fast they are to exit. This stands in opposition to those claiming the majority of people now wanted to remain, aka brexit regret.

sardia wrote:The government has so many chances to reverse course and all they're doing is discussing how hard or gay fast they are to exit. This stands in opposition to those claiming the majority of people now wanted to remain, aka brexit regret.

No it doesn't. Are you thinking that the government would be having a re-run if it was likely most people now want to remain? The forces pushing us to brexit aren't really much to do with the wishes of the majority of people.

Both sides of voice are louder than before. Those who were vociferous before, and have not changed their minds, know they must shout louder. Those who were wavering before, but now see that it was close, are more likely to have made up their minds more, either with or against where they originally wavered. A good proportion of the inactive (nearly a third of voters didn't!) are probably less likely to leave it to everyone else, also.

Leave cannot afford risking a full rerun, of course, lest they lose their surprise win. They're doing everything they can to act against any 'best of three' suggestion, because of that.

It's politically much easier for the government to go ahead with Brexit than have a re-run, put up with the explosive reaction from leavers, and run the risk of looking ridiculous if it ends in another vote for leave, and if it ends in a vote for remain having to explain why 1-1 means we stay. It would take a HUGE shift in public opinion for staying to be politically feasible now.

Having a re-run has the problem that if it reverses the result, there will be calls for another re-run to see if it reverses the result again, and so on ad infinitum. I think that if Theresa May, (who supported Remain), wanted to stay in the EU she would call a general election, making it clear that she considered winning to be a sufficient mandate.

I think that she would only consider doing this if there was a significant shift in the EU policy of free movement. This won't happen by the UK persuading the EU negotiators - there seems to be quite a bit of hostility there. It might happen, though if the voters in France, Italy and Germany thought it was a good idea. I can't help thinking that Boris's talk of 'punishment beatings' is partly aimed at these voters. Staying with the status quo often seems to be the safest choice - to 'always keep a hold of nurse for fear of finding something worse'. But if it is presented as standing up to a bully, well that's a different matter.

If such a shift occurs then the Conservatives could present it a result of their efforts to get the best of all worlds for the British. With the Labour party in some disarray they might win a convincing majority in an election. (Of course they will take the results of the upcoming by elections into account). My guess is that despite the 'Brexit means Brexit' talk, they would jump at this opportunity if they thought it was a possibility

The UK passport could turn dark blue again after Brexit under a £490m contract to redesign and produce a new version of the document.

Conservative MP Andrew Rosindell said the burgundy passport had been a source of national “humiliation”. He told the Press Association: “The restoration of our own British passport is a clear statement to the world that Britain is back. Our British identity was slowly but surely being submerged into an artificial European one that most Brits felt increasingly unhappy about.

“The humiliation of having a pink European Union passport will now soon be over and the United Kingdom nationals can once again feel pride and self-confidence in their own nationality when travelling, just as the Swiss and Americans can do.

A half a billion pounds for a design? I know Britain was dumb enough to spend half a million for the godawful 2012 Olympics logo that looks like Lisa Simpson going down on her headless brother, but wow, what's in the water over there?

CorruptUser wrote:A half a billion pounds for a design? I know Britain was dumb enough to spend half a million for the godawful 2012 Olympics logo that looks like Lisa Simpson going down on her headless brother, but wow, what's in the water over there?

And that's not even getting started on Britart...

"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling." - Bjarne Stroustrupwww.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

CorruptUser wrote:A half a billion pounds for a design? I know Britain was dumb enough to spend half a million for the godawful 2012 Olympics logo that looks like Lisa Simpson going down on her headless brother, but wow, what's in the water over there?

And that's not even getting started on Britart...

I for one despise the "artists" that think "obscene" is the same as "pushing boundaries". Showing genitals, feces, and gore is just offensive and lazy, showing a religious/political icon as a horrific self-serving hypocrite is actually pushing a boundary.

CorruptUser wrote:A half a billion pounds for a design? I know Britain was dumb enough to spend half a million for the godawful 2012 Olympics logo that looks like Lisa Simpson going down on her headless brother, but wow, what's in the water over there?

And that's not even getting started on Britart...

I for one despise the "artists" that think "obscene" is the same as "pushing boundaries". Showing genitals, feces, and gore is just offensive and lazy, showing a religious/political icon as a horrific self-serving hypocrite is actually pushing a boundary.

Is there art that you end up seeing which offends you regularly? Like do you go to an art exhibit, but all the artwork is obscene?

I have walked into a museum before and thought, "I am going to see a gallery of pictures of naked people somewhere in here."

Indeed I did. Many of them had fruit on their heads.

There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

The difference between art and porn is the price you pay for it. But I'm not talking about Renaissance paintings and such, I'm talking about Shock Art in general, because someone had mentioned Britart.

Psh I did not have the money to pay for tickets to art museums. This was totally free.

There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

I'm not young, but (as far as I'm concerned) my vision of a UK passport has always been of a... burgandy..? ..yes, I think so... dignified-looking red passport. Looking it up, it looks like I may have misremembered this, though, as I travelled abroad (in Europe) prior to '88.

But blue... makes me think of the US passport (or other more exotic nations that Bourne may discover he has in his newly discovered safe-deposit-box). Doesn't seem British to me. Unless it's made a brighter blue than the old one, more like the Royal Blue on the Union Flag1. In which case it could be brighter red (fully pure saturated) to match the St George/Patrick crosses. Or white, with various red and blue triangles2 and make it look like a full on groovy Austin Powers-era thing...

Actually, if it has to be a subdued hue, I wouldn't mind going for British Racing Green. (It'd annoy Daily Mail readers, who would assume it was an islamic thing. Which is just a bonus, as far as I'm concerned, because I personally know some of these people and they need annoying through their own misassumptions...)

1 And, after posting, I remembered what my Avatar currently looks like.2 ...again, related to my avatar, non-uniform passport colouration must include a status bar...

The weird part is that European (EU) passports aren't even uniform in color. They clearly have this whole burgundy-theme going on, but there's still plenty of variation, including a few blue ones. I'm sure Britain could have gotten away with blue passports while still in the EU, if they had wanted to.

Does passport color actually have anything to do with being in the EU? Mine is burgundy, I guess, but it was the same color before my country joined the EU. From Diadem's link plenty of the red/burgundy passports are also not members of the EU like Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro, Monaco, and Russia.

Apparently, yes. There is (already since 1981) a standard to harmonize passports. Same size, similar colour, same information on the same pages, same spelling of names (English spelling!), standards for machine-readable content.

It is a nice example of the British attitude towards the EU. For someone from a smaller EU member state (like me) such harmonization sounds good. I can't expect every border control worldwide to recognise a Dutch passport, or to be equipped to deal with them efficiently. There's always the risk that you enter some airport, and the locals don't trust your passport, say that it misses crucial information or feature, etc. A recognizable EU standard greatly reduces that risk.

On the other end of the scale, the US can safely assume that people abroad will adapt to whatever passport they give out. If they issue letter-sized polka dot passports, airports will accept polka dot passports. If they issue barcode neck tattoos, other countries will install tattoo readers.

AFAICT, there's a section of the British people who very much want to be in the US league of countries. A country that other countries adapt to. And they are almost personally offended by suggestions that they might not be in that league.

Ironically, I suspect that a future British passport will mostly follow either the EU standard (aside from the colour and other details), or follow the US.

It is a nice example of the British attitude towards the EU. For someone from a smaller EU member state (like me) such harmonization sounds good.

Yes, exactly. Once again someone managed to paint a key benefit as a 'drawback' based on some vague, feel-good notion of jingoism.

Heck, even as no longer part of the EU there would be big efficiency savings in only commissioning a single, pan-Euro design for next-gen secure passporting. Even if we only saved 10% on our £500m bill that would still be £50m that can go towards the salaries of teachers and doctors.

Plus, maybe it would mean UK citizens not having to fork out £70+ for a passport renewal...(!)